Duchess v. Langston Corporation
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
HESTER, Judge:
Donald J. and Catherine A. Duchess appeal from the judgment entered after a jury determined that appellee, Langston Corporation, was not liable in this products liability action. We conclude that the trial court made two erroneous evidentiary rulings; we are constrained to reverse and remand for a new trial.
Appellants instituted this action on August 21, 1991, to recover damages they sustained after Mr. Duchess was injured on May 12, 1990. Mr. Duchess was employed by 4M Manufacturing in Eighty Four, Pennsylvania. On the day in question, he was working on a Langston Saturn III…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ault v. International Harvester Co.California Supreme Court · 1974
- Wilkes-Barre Iron & Wire Works, Inc. v. Pargas of Wilkes-Barre, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Gottfried v. American Can Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Leaphart v. Whiting Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Matsko v. HARLEY DAVIDSON MOT. CO., INC.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Commonwealth v. NypaverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Duchess v. Langston Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Phatak v. United Chair Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Clark v. Bil-Jax, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Bonda v. Point Marion Ford Sales Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County2000
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.